£160 million!

[jimmyscoular]

BBC say Tottenham are asking £160 million for Harry Kane. It's incredible.

City sold John Toshack to Liverpool in 1971 for £110,000, which, according to the Bank of England's online inflation calculator, is the equivalent of £1.6 million today. Now, OK, Kane is better than Toshack, but 100 times better?

The money in football is amazing.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Re: £160 million!

BBC say Tottenham are asking £160 million for Harry Kane. It's incredible.

City sold John Toshack to Liverpool in 1971 for £110,000, which, according to the Bank of England's online inflation calculator, is the equivalent of £1.6 million today. Now, OK, Kane is better than Toshack, but 100 times better?

The money in football is amazing.

TV money innit. Only those at Anfield probably saw Tosh playing on a Saturday afternoon but millions of people around the world will see Kane ply his trade on a Sunday afternoon or Monday evening. It's not necessarily a good thing when armchair fans around the globe are the main target audience, of course....

[the other bob wilson]

Re: £160 million!

It'll be interesting to see how people react to the Premier League when there are crowds in the ground. Well before the ESL shambles, I'd had more than enough of the greedy league last season and often would watch National League or EFL matches before the Premier League. Although I can't be sure, I got the feeling that there were plenty of people who felt the same way.

If Man City are really trying to sign Kane and Grealish with their neighbours seemingly set to spend over £100 million themselves this summer at a time when so many other clubs have barely survived the last eighteen months, then the Manchester clubs' version of the game is one that I just can't be bothered with. When you consider Man City's complete lack of success in the Champions League, both Manchester clubs have had a terrible return for all of that money they've spent under their current managers.

As for Kane, if any current England player comes close to meriting their transfer valuation, then I'd say it's him because he added a dimension to his game that I for one didn't think he possessed last season, but, even so, £160 million just seems ridiculous for a football player.

[Toadstool]

Re: £160 million!

With Barca & Madrid seemingly out of the market this summer I thought prices would be lower, but perhaps city see next season as their chance at the CL and will buy it if they have to.
Saw a story yesterday that Liverpool ( not one of the huge teams these days ) are looking at Mbappe!

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: £160 million!

It'll be interesting to see how people react to the Premier League when there are crowds in the ground.

I'm guessing fans will cheer on their own teams and jeer the opposition. Same as it ever was.

[goats]

Re: £160 million!

With Barca & Madrid seemingly out of the market this summer I thought prices would be lower, but perhaps city see next season as their chance at the CL and will buy it if they have to.
Saw a story yesterday that Liverpool ( not one of the huge teams these days ) are looking at Mbappe!

They can look all day long….:hehe:
Don’t rate Kane, be very interesting to see if he can turn it on under pressure at a big club anyway ( I know Spurs are big I mean title race cup finals etc) did he even score at the Euros I can’t recall?

[the other bob wilson]

Re: £160 million!

I'm guessing fans will cheer on their own teams and jeer the opposition. Same as it ever was.

I think you know the point I was making is will having a full house at these games improve them as a spectacle for those watching at home? The lack of crowds didn't bother me first when watching a game as a neutral, but it did as time went on - having no one watching a National League game didn't seem too much different from normal.

[Hilts]

Re: £160 million!

They can look all day long….:hehe:
Don’t rate Kane, be very interesting to see if he can turn it on under pressure at a big club anyway ( I know Spurs are big I mean title race cup finals etc) did he even score at the Euros I can’t recall?

He scored 4.

[Cleve van Leef]

Re: £160 million!

It'll be interesting to see how people react to the Premier League when there are crowds in the ground. Well before the ESL shambles, I'd had more than enough of the greedy league last season and often would watch National League or EFL matches before the Premier League. Although I can't be sure, I got the feeling that there were plenty of people who felt the same way.

If Man City are really trying to sign Kane and Grealish with their neighbours seemingly set to spend over £100 million themselves this summer at a time when so many other clubs have barely survived the last eighteen months, then the Manchester clubs' version of the game is one that I just can't be bothered with. When you consider Man City's complete lack of success in the Champions League, both Manchester clubs have had a terrible return for all of that money they've spent under their current managers.

As for Kane, if any current England player comes close to meriting their transfer valuation, then I'd say it's him because he added a dimension to his game that I for one didn't think he possessed last season, but, even so, £160 million just seems ridiculous for a football player.

And Man City have got away for years with their “accounting” of monies spent which the governing bodies have tried to penalise them for. Cheating doesn’t always win.

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: £160 million!

I think you know the point I was making is will having a full house at these games improve them as a spectacle for those watching at home? The lack of crowds didn't bother me first when watching a game as a neutral, but it did as time went on - having no one watching a National League game didn't seem too much different from normal.

I honestly didn't know what point you were trying to make.

I can only speak for myself, but I ended up watching more Premier League football than ever before last season. The main reason for that is obvious - the lockdowns of various descriptions meant there wasn't much else to do. However, I watched a lot more of the Premier League and a lot less of the Championship than in previous seasons because, with the exception of a small handful of teams at the top, the standard of the football in the second tier was mostly garbage.

As of the National League, that's on BT, which I haven't subscribed to for several years.

[surge]

Re: £160 million!

Man City haven't yet spent a penny in this transfer window so this year has the potential to be just their third season of net profit directly from the transfer market since turn of the century.

They haven't had a season of net profit directly from transfer market yet this decade.

Lot's of talk about raising money from Sane and fringe sales but that's already been dwarfed by their outgoings in transfer market.

Lot's to admire about the club but they simply couldn't act in the manner that they do without such wealthy owners. Wealthy owners who have been accuses as using the club as means of sportswashing, though they're not the only club to be accused of that.

A) Everyone knew this was coming and yet it was Bale making headlines in English press (seemingly without substance) this summer instead of Kane. Why was that?
B) Will there become a point where football thinks the market will continue to grow and instead there will be a crash?

[The Lone Gunman]

Re: £160 million!

Lot's to admire about the club but they simply couldn't act in the manner that they do without such wealthy owners.

That can be said of most clubs these days, including Cardiff City.

[BlueArmy 86]

Re: £160 million!

Imagine the fuss if Sterling didn't turn up for training to force a move....

[surge]

Re: £160 million!

Imagine the fuss if Sterling didn't turn up for training to force a move....

I don't know, the number of "imagine the fuss" comments is starting to match the amount of attention a player like Sterling or Pogba would get. The big difference is how neutral or even positive the tone is when we know Sterling/Pogba wouldn't get that.

Helps that Levy is already seen as such a villain and that Kane is England's captain. But gentleman's agreement or not, Spurs aren't going to sell on the cheap and Kane shouldn't expect them to.

[surge]

Re: £160 million!

That story about England team-mates reporting he'd go on strike. I thought it was drivel. Looks like it was true. The idea of the England captain sharing bantz with his City buds about how to bust his contract at Spurs in the middle of the Euros...

Doesn't sit well with me

https://twitter.com/saxonTHFC/status...80851442786305

Is this genuine? Can't say I heard it having tried to avoid the "and now we're off to the England camp" nature of the BBC/ITV coverage but i) did you hear it? and ii) was it as hot a story as it should have been?